Itta/483/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S. Prasad Film Laboratories Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULYTWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.483 OF 2012 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax-IHyderabad ..... Appellant AND M/s. Prasad Film Laboratories Ltd., LV Prasad Marg, Banjara Hills,Hyderabad. .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be preferred against thejudgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 7.11.2006in relation to the assessment year 2001-02, on the followingsuggested questions of law: 1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that theassessee was entitled to treat the un-recovered duesas business loss and set off the same as againstincome?case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that theassessee was entitled to treat the un-recovered duesas business loss and set off the same as againstincome? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding thatthe assessee was entitled to treat the un-recovereddues towards cost of films supplied to producers asbusiness loss though the assessee is not involved inbusiness of purchase and sale of films?case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding thatthe assessee was entitled to treat the un-recovereddues towards cost of films supplied to producers asbusiness loss though the assessee is not involved inbusiness of purchase and sale of films? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the ITAT is justified in allowing irrecoverabledues on account of cost of films against income fromfilm processing?case, the ITAT is justified in allowing irrecoverabledues on account of cost of films against income fromfilm processing? We have heard the learned counsel for the appellantand we have gone through the impugned judgment andorder of the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal whiledeciding this matter has followed its earlier decision in theassessee’s own case in ITA No.274/Hyd/02 and141/Hyd/03 for the assessment year 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 being dated 15.09.2006. There is no statement beforeus that the said decision was carried in appeal and thesame was upset. Therefore, we do not see any reason tointerfere with the impugned judgment and order. Consequently we dismiss the appeal. No order as tocosts ______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. __________ G.Rohini, J.